PULL THE TRIGGER: OUR FASCINATION WITH GUNS

 

Person Holding Black Revolver in Bokeh Photography

“Aim-Fire!”


cock and unload

I am from the state of Wisconsin, and coming from the Midwest you are used to people owning guns. Now that I live in New York City, people think that it is odd to own a gun in this city. The only people you hear about that own guns outside the police are criminals. So what is it, what is the need to own guns. Because yes, we have a right to bare arms, but sometimes we take it to the extreme in the United States. There are people who own guns that foreign countries don’t have in their military arsenal. And we all say the same thing which is, “It’s my right.” But this goes far beyond rights to own a gun. Because consider myself someone who believes in your right to own a gun or guns. And I even like the well-known M16 assault rifle as well as the Desert Eagle hand gun. But where does all this come from in America?

1789

When the 2nd amendment was drafted it was written because the United States had just won the war against the British. So it made sense to have a well orchestrated during that time period. But when you look at the times of today, this is considered outdated, but we still have a right to bare arms. A lot of it has to do with protecting your household. But we also haver to look at the document for the time period. The men of the past who drafted up these documents could have never seen citizens owning the type of weaponry that kills its own citizens. The purpose was to fight outside forces not our own citizens. So that is the problem with using the argument of the fore fathers of America and their intent.

playing off of fears

When you live in a major metropolitan city, you should be a lot more cautious about where you live. But the reality for most Americans is that they don’t need the weapons they do where they reside. But most Americans live in rural areas with very little crime, but a high gun ownership. They own guns off the idea of what could happen in this country from a force that they most likely will never come in contact with. So this country plays off of fears because the typical gun owners are not connected into a diverse environment that allows them to see reality from fiction. And yes, there are bad things that happen everywhere, but to a large degree people are more scared than they need to be.


Personal Website: http://www.faheemjackson.squarespace.com

Instagram Me: @theefaheemjackson; @faheemjacksonphotography

Twitter Me: @2320howe

WHEN THERE’S BLOOD IN THE STREET, BUY MORE GUNS: GUNS AND ECONOMICS

Black Rifle

“Safety and security.”


the second amendment

Having the right to bare arms is a right that has been in place in the United States of America going back to the late 1700’s. Yet the amendment was revised in the year 1992, shockingly enough, revisions weren’t made really for almost two centuries. But nonetheless, we still have these rights to bare arms that was laid down by America’s fore fathers.

social over the political

The social aspects of society as it pertains to guns are far different from the political decisions. Protest erupt whenever there is an incident of a mass shooting. And the same outcome, which is nothing because so many Americans have the right to bare arms. Now, could we be seeing a rollback on a lot of the gun laws? Or maybe, just maybe will we see a new revision to the United States Constitution. Because understand, at one point in time, the Thomas machine gun was around. Now, unless you own it as an antique, it’s highly illegal.

mad money

What are the economic impacts of guns on society. Because on one hand, people don’t go out and spend money in areas where gun violence are a problem. But at the same time, anytime mass shootings take place, the sale of firearms increase. So there is this positive and negative effect on the use of guns in our society. Now, no one wants to think of he positive outcomes of gun violence, but from an economic standpoint there are positives. Needing law enforcement officers are the negatives attributed to crime. A person carrying a gun to keep other gunmen in check.

balance

There not only need to be a balance in social and political, but a balance in the mass production of weaponry. But, what we are seeing is the breakdown of what guns are in a society, so what will happen economically? Hand guns will be tougher to rollback, but what will happen to the ownership of high powered rifles the more people fight against them?


My Personal Website: www.faheemjackson.squarespace.com

Instagram Me: @theefaheemjackson

Twitter Me: @2320howe

Medium.com/@faheemjackson

Tumblr Me: @fjackson44

GUN COUNTRY: THE DIVISIVENESS OF FIREARMS COVERSATIONS

Image result for GUNS IN AMERICA

“My 2nd amendment says so.”


It has only been a few days since the mass shooting in Las Vegas which claimed the lives of 58 people. And already political pundits are in conversations surrounding gun ownership. Should we be able to own them or not? Should the ownership of guns be based on the caliber of weapon? Because a lot of people have no problem with handguns. But when it comes to higher caliber weapons, that’s when the conversation intensifies. And the guns of choice that causes such controversy are the following: AR-15, AK47, Tech9 Uzi, M16, and the 50/60 caliber rifles. These are weapons that can pump out multiple bullets in just seconds. Some ask, why do you need to own a gun with such force. Others say why not because it’s our rights. Well, both people for and against to an extent would be right. Well, how so?

On the side of the gun control people, there is some logic to additional control on top of the already gun control. Number one, there should be to some extent, psychological background checks in order to own firearms. Your mental health should come into play when owning a gun. Any mental instability should raise a red flag. Now, even if the person seek help and they are in a better mental space than prior, they should still have a tough time attaining a gun. Another rational argument is that it is an amendment, but the time period in which the document was written is totally different than today. In the times of the second amendment being written, they intended for people to own the guns of their time period. The second amendment also was to keep an additional checks and balance over the government so we wouldn’t be subject to abuse from the system. But if the government wanted to stop you in today’s society, your highest caliber of rifle couldn’t stop them.

As for the gun owners in America who feel their rights are being infringed upon, they have a different point of view. They understand the background checks, but guns that are killing people everyday in America are not by legalized owners. A lot of the high statistics are aimed at the inner city communities where guns are used in gangland battles. And politicians are using that statistic to restrict gun owners, while not addressing the problem in these communities. And a lot of these guns used are stolen anyways, so background checks don’t work all the time. As far as the second amendment, the fore fathers did think of the guns of their time. But using that logic, the guns of their time was muskets, but the guns of our time are higher caliber rifles. We also have the right to protect our homes and families just as well as the public figures of America. Considering the homes invaded on a daily and nightly basis are the homes of the average Joe.

In the end, political conversations have been going debating this issues for years. Nothing is going to happen because for the most part, gun ownership is seen as more of a conservative viewpoint. And even with the country switching between liberal and conservative, conservatism in America still reigns supreme. And as long as we have a large country-municipal-township-America and a smaller metropolis America, gun ownership will be around. Meaning, a lot of people against gun ownership usually live in major metropolitan cities. But America is not a metropolis, it’s a lot of towns and cities you have never heard of. And as long as they exist, we will see gun ownership in America.


https://faheemjackson.squarespace.com/ (PERSONAL WEBSITE)

https://www.facebook.com/fjacks063 (FAN PAGE)

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_n_0?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Afaheem+jackson&keywords=faheem+jackson&ie=UTF8&qid=1492966094&rnid=2941120011   

@theefaheemjackson Instagram

@2320howe Twitter

LOST HOPE = LOST LIVES: WHY SO MANY SUFFER BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS OF A FEW

Related image

“When the actions of one effects so many.”


Last night, America was hit with breaking news coverage of another mass shooting. This time in Las Vegas when a gunman opened fire on a crowd of people attending the concert of country music recording artist Jason Aldean. What people at first thought to be fire works turned out to be gun fire. The shooting was coming from one of the hotel windows of the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Resort. The assailant targeted crowd of people who were at the Route 91 Harvest grounds, which is located across the street from the hotel and casino. This morning the news has now confirmed fifty people dead and over four hundred wounded. Now my topic today is why must the actions of a few dictate so much of our daily lives? Because I can already hear the critics against so much of the second amendment. Should we be having these discussions instead of honoring the victims?

My first view is of the actions of a few. So many of the laws we put into place are always in response of a few people. And when I say the few, I mean 10 people who affects the lives of 10,000 others. It shouldn’t be allowed considering 10:10,000 is of such low significance. But when you see the aftermath of these ten people, then you’re able to somewhat understand. Because last night the person who did this was responsible for hundreds being affected. Now think if 10 people were assailants last night. Which is why we are forced to change the way we all live. So, does this mean we need stricter gun laws in the United States? Because like I stated in the paragraph prior, you can already hear the arguments being made over gun control. And should we observing what has taken place last night?

Now, those that are not into the political debate will say it’s too early for such comments. But we have no choice but to discuss this as well as why this shooting has taken place. We are already in a very socially and politically charged climate right now. So who knows what the reasoning for the shooting could be. But since the assailant is dead, we will not, at least for the time being, know why this took place. But we can all agree that we are living in a very divisive country right now. From the crisis in Houston and the Caribbean stemming from the the hurricanes to the politically charged protest in the NFL. But in the end, when life is at stake, or life is lost, it stalls so much in society. And in this landscape when there is chaos, we come to each others’ aid. But, above all, in the future, I only hope we can decrease the chances of these incidents like what took place last night in Vegas from happening.


https://faheemjackson.squarespace.com/ (PERSONAL WEBSITE)

https://www.facebook.com/fjacks063 (FAN PAGE)

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_nr_n_0?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Afaheem+jackson&keywords=faheem+jackson&ie=UTF8&qid=1492966094&rnid=2941120011   

@theefaheemjackson Instagram

@2320howe Twitter

RIGHT 2 CARRY

Image result for 2nd amendment

“How relevant are they really?”

As we enter a race for a new president of the United States, one of the topics of interest pertains to the place in which guns have purpose in our lives. And I am not referring to law enforcement officers, but civilians. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution clearly states we have the right to bare arms. What does that mean? Does that mean I have the right to bare any arms? Is it limited to certain guns? Or did that mean something different for the time period in which people were living during the time the document was written.

The lines starts to blur between what is an acceptable gun to have and the right to access such guns. Pistols are clearly alright by most, but a high powered gun like the AR-15, tends to rub people the wrong way. Me myself, it’s hard to say because you do have questions. Why does one need something such as an M16, AK47, or the AR-15. What are the provisions one should have placed on them when you want to own a fully automatic rifle. Even the language is subject for debate because gun owners and enthusiast alike disagree with the populace over what is an assault rifle or not.

Well let’s first observe the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The document was written at the end of the year 1791, and since then debates have gone back and forth for the past 225 plus years. When we talk about the 2nd Amendment there are two areas of interest: gun control and gun rights. When taking away the gun (control) you start to infringe on people’s sense of security (rights). But what is a right? Rights are established in a society to give people the freedom and alienable ability to live how they choose so long as it does not negatively effect the lives of others (social morality).

Now when you are lax on the gun, people feel their rights are not being infringed upon. Well what has people up in arms about the topic. In the recent years, there has been a stretch of shootings using high powered rifles like the AR-15. Victims of those lost reach out asking for stricter gun control. While the gun owners feel the laws are fine the way they have always been. But today it’s a fight; between the owners not wanting to give them up and the government trying to restrict usage of certain guns. The government simply says we are trying to lower the risk of higher victim count. Gun owners say the government are using mass shootings as a platform to put policy in place to harm them for others irresponsible behavior.

Being responsible is very important to take notice of. Why? Because the majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens. They realize the severity of owning a gun and work to keep themselves from getting into a legality situation. Their argument is that the majority of gun violence comes by way of illegal handguns. Illegal is key because if you’re willing to own a gun unregistered and brandish it in public, you’re not concerned with policy by the government. Another argument is that gun owners feel the government is using a crime statistic, which comes from urban gang violence, to push their agenda. While not addressing that issue (inner city crime), which to them (gun owners) seem like a much bigger problem.

But the government says otherwise in their claims. They feel by restricting the amount of rounds one is able to possess; even in the case of a mass shooting casualties are lessened. We also have politicians who want to go as far banning all guns that don’t fall under the equation of handgun or shotgun/rifle designated for hunting deer and other small to midsize game. The government would further say that when the 2nd Amendment was written, it was suppose to be intended for muskets, not M16 assault rifles. Now gun owners would disagree stating that the individuals then were merely using the technological weaponry of their day. But the rebuttal from the government would be the forefathers could not have foreseen assault rifles. These men were also slave owners, which gives the government an in to imply that the forefathers were not right about everything as well even if you think the forefathers would have agreed.

In the end, the fight will continue between the two sides: those for guns and those for gun control. America already has more guns per capita than any nation globally, quite odd considering we are not in war time. It will continue, so long as the people feel infringed upon and the government feels cause to interfere in ones’ life if they see ones’ life or lifestyle to be morally unfit and a threat to this nation.